Comments on Civics Geeks: Why do conservatives oppose "universal health care...

You're absolutely right about the 10th amendment b...

2008-07-28T15:12:00.000-04:00

You're absolutely right about the 10th amendment being ignored.

And the rest of our Constitution.

It's shameful.

I think the powers of the federal government are w...

2008-07-28T08:41:00.000-04:00

I think the powers of the federal government are well defined by our Constitution...

In theory, yes. But our “rulers” look to more than the Constitution (and hence the consent of the governed) for what defines their powers. Sometimes what defines their powers is their own will. That whole Tenth Amendment thing is ignored or dismissed.

Anyhoo, I agree that the Constitution should be what defines the powers of the federal government.

Hey Kyle, Thanks for the comments.You write,"... t...

2008-07-28T00:18:00.000-04:00

Hey Kyle,

Thanks for the comments.

You write,

"... the operative question is how to have universal healthcare, perhaps through public funding, without consolidating and centralizing government power over healthcare."

I want to say the honest answer to this question is that it's not possible to have universal care (whether or not there is such a thing is debatable, I think) without imposing it from above.

As to your other point:

"an underlying problem in this debate is that the powers of the US government are ill or vaguely defined"

I think the powers of the federal government are well defined by our Constitution; I think we interpret them in an expansive and ultimately incorrect way. The powers that are defined are few and limited. We have long disregarded the limits imposed on government by the Constitution in the name of progress. I think a return to the limited government described by the Constitution would be a great blessing.

It is true, however, that the powers of the state governments are not well defined and very malleable. Better-defined state power would be a good thing. We should pay closer attention to our local elections!

I am sympathetic towards a policy of public fundin...

2008-07-25T12:11:00.000-04:00

I am sympathetic towards a policy of public funding for healthcare, but very skeptical of those wielding political power controlling the system and making the pertinent healthcare decisions. I tend to distrust power structures, especially when matters of life and death are involved. Specific example: I've read that Senator Clinton and Speak Pelosi object to healthcare professionals and institutions receiving public funding if they refuse to offer abortifacients. Public funding of healthcare comes with strings attached.

For me, the operative question is how to have universal healthcare, perhaps through public funding, without consolidating and centralizing government power over healthcare.

An aside: an underlying problem in this debate is that the powers of the US government are ill or vaguely defined. Our government does much it doesn't need to, much of which it shouldn't do, so when an increase is made of the scope of government power, it adds to the confusing jumbled mess of proper jurisdiction and authority and tyrannical (even if benevolent) usurpation. We may need to have a big government; we do need to have clearly defined powers of what government can and cannot do.

I hadn't.Interesting how things are spun.

2008-07-19T22:03:00.000-04:00

I hadn't.

Interesting how things are spun.

Did you see the Bunk study stating 2/3 of doctors ...

2008-07-18T05:51:00.000-04:00

Did you see the Bunk study stating 2/3 of doctors in America want National Health Care. The doctors who did this study also conducted one in 2002 and found that the majority of doctors did not want national health care, the problem with this is that the 2 question surveys drastically differ in there 2nd question. I found this article, 60% of Physicians Surveyed Oppose Switching to a National Health Care Plan, It's worth a read.